It has concerned me greatly that the meme that same sex marriage is a civil right has come out of left field without any discussion or debate.  This is a concern because allowing same sex marriage to be normalized, changes the very definition and purpose of marriage. Marriage between one man and one women has been the bedrock of civilization. Procreation and the right of children to have a mother and a father have been central to the idea of marriage.

Same sex marriage fundamentally changes the traditional definition of family. It is the final death blow to  marriage that began in the 1930’s with the permitting of contraception in some circumstances, at the Lambeth Conference (Anglican),  the sexual revolution and the loosening of divorce laws.

Yes I know that there are many who do not share the view that same sex marriage harms the institution. But I have not read or heard one argument based on reason, and not on sentimental emotion, in defense of same sex marriage.

Instead those who have sound rational reasons against same sex marriage are equated with southerners who were against the civil rights movement. It has come down from the bully pulpit of our betters the ruling class. And it has been helped along by judicial fiat. Judges in a few states have declared same sex marriage a civil right. My state, Iowa regretfully is one of them. But at least I have a chance to vote them off the bench.

Apparently the deacons wife is a bigot.

Mollie over at Get Religion writes on the non debate. Note: Get Religion is a blog that uncovers the religious ghosts in new reporting. So if you comment, please do not debate the issue.

There’s this New York Times feature called “Room for Debate.” The name alone, and its presence on the opinion pages, led me to believe that maybe there would be, I don’t know, a debate between the featured participants. The topic yesterday was “same-sex families,” the hook a new movie about a lesbian couple and their children. But there was no debate that I saw. Featured opinions ranged from those of Dan Savage to those of an Evergreen College professor. It was just a given that society should have no qualms about same-sex parenting. The end. The ruling class marches on.

That’s fine — if unbelievably boring, predictable and close minded — for opinion pages, I guess. But, as I’ve documented approximately eleventy billion times in the past couple of years, the same problem plagues the “news” pages of most major papers.

For just a tiny example of the weaknesses in how same-sex marriage is treated, let’s take a look at coverage of a new Public Religion Research Institute poll. Now, nowhere in the Los Angeles Times story or in the Religion News Service story will you learn that PRRI is a liberal group that is not unbiased when it comes to same-sex marriage. No, the Los Angeles Times describes the group behind the poll as a “Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit” and a “nonpartisan research and education group.”

You know what might be helpful to learn about the poll? That the poll was financed by a liberal foundation. The purpose of the poll, according to the Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund was:

To survey California religious communities and help develop religious education strategies supporting gay equality. $107,500

No, the mainstream media didn’t report that the poll was designed with advocacy in mind. And it was even mentioned in the organization’s own press release announcing the poll! (They also claim funding from the Ford Foundation.)